This one's stock only, as per the previous releases... Of course there was the Baldwin Motion version, but don't expect Round 2 to combine it with future releases of this stock Z28 kit anytime soon . Unless they make jillions of dollars from impulse buyers purchasing their horrid General Cereal Lee kits! ( )

and yes crazyjim, it molded in orange. Though some have them marked "molded in white", NEVER believe what they say on the box unless u wanna get skrewed by them saying its molded in that color, but itsa not!! And It's REALLY ANOYING!!!!!

i always enjoy stocking up the partsbox and im no big fan of chevies so if i toss a SBC in there it will probalby stay there untill i decide to build a civic or something but if i toss a 454 in there at least there is some hope of it ever seeing a decent build

(im planning on building the camaro with a DOHC hemi for that perfect blend of camaro looks and hemi power)

Full Name:Doing the grunt work so the U.S. Postal Service can deliver your mail.

Posted 23 February 2011 - 11:45 PM

Molded in Color...Molded in Color...all of the recent AMT/"MPC" reissues that don't come in the fancy pants retro boxes are molded in color *bangs head of desk*...why? Did I miss the part where this old practice of Monogram and Revell was missed and desired? Styrene doesn't come pre-colored, it costs extra that way...I thought Round 2 was broke *pounds head of desk*

The original release Camaro(1989)was a 2n1 kit. It could be built stock with a 350 or street with a big block,tunnel ram,two fours,headers and custom wheels that I first saw in the AHC100 Camaro(not sure if that's the first kit they came out in,but they are the first kit I saw them in). Two hoods for some reason,they're both flat and one has a hole cut out. This kit doesn't share a single part with the newer release Camaro. Look in "under glass" and you'll find a thread devoted to '70 1/2 Camaros.

To avoid any potential confusion, I wouldn't call the 1989 (see box art below) kit "the orginal release" since it was actually the final version of AMT's annual kit that evolved from 1971-7 and ended up as the AHC100 custom. There was a very, very poor attempt to backdate the kit into a 1970 Camaro in '89, and I don't think it's a stretch to say it's not a well-liked kit. Bad enough that they just started over with the kits discussed up the thread. It's too bad they ruined this tool, since the earlier Camaro kits were all pretty nice, and it would have been nice to see them return as reissues. Now they just have a messed-up annual tool that's basically good for nothing.

The chassis and engine in the 1989 kit actually date back to the 1969 annual. Like Mark said, the original annuals were quite nice and would be nice to have. The 1970 annual had molded in vinyl top texture and all the 1970-73 AMT annuals were the non-Rally Sport body style with the full-width front bumper. I have a number of these in my collection and really like them. The originals were 3-n-1's with stock, custom, and drag options.

I also have three or four of the 1989 issue pictures that will be used as donor kits to restore my annuals.

Bad enough that they just started over with the kits discussed up the thread. It's too bad they ruined this tool, since the earlier Camaro kits were all pretty nice, and it would have been nice to see them return as reissues. Now they just have a messed-up annual tool that's basically good for nothing.

How is it bad that they started over? The newer release Camaro is 10x better in every way. As far as the earlier Camaros being nice?? Again, Those kits under hood,engine,chassis,interior,and in some cases,bodies, leave a lot to be desired. They're good for a curbside build unless you kitbash them with the newer release Camaro.

I have to respectfully disagree. As an owner of a real one, that revamped annual version kit is not even good enough for a simple curbside.

As an aficionado of vintage model kits, only the level of detail, especially chassis and engine detail, is an improvement over the annuals. As a former owner of a second generation Camaro, the look and feel of the rest of the "newer" 1970.5 Camaro missed the boat. I would rather have the outside "look" right as the details are not seen once the car is on the shelf.

The 1989 kit WAS SO BAD that AMT started from scratch for the Z/Baldwin Motion tooling instead of re-using the annual kit. That make sense now? It's not bad that they tooled a new kit. The new kit was tooled up because the old one was bad.

In the case of the Camaro, it's possible that the amount & size of the different parts between the Z-28 & Baldwin-Motion versions made it too costly to combine the two kits, based on potential sales. The Z-28 has a SBC, the B/M car a big block, & they each have different hoods & other parts. Packaging could be an issue as well. I know those older kits were often 2-3-4/1 kits, but they had less parts for detailing the kits, (examples are engines consisting of 10 or so parts, & the 4 piece interiors), that took up less space, thus allowing more different parts to be included in those older kits. I have the Z-28 kit & as I recall, it's pretty tightly packed in there.

The two kits I mentioned didn't have that many different parts between versions in prior releases. The Fords had different rim & tire options, different induction options, different exhaust manifolds. different valve covers, & in the case of the custom variant, a set of laker style pipes & a set of traction bars, & that was it.

The Poncho had different front & rear seats & door panels, (button tufted for the custom version), different wheels & tires, different grille oprions, (custom had a tube grille), & a set of optional lake pipes for the custom & again that was it.

In both cases, all of those optional parts were a small amount of what was in the kit, & other than the custom interior options for the Pontiac, took up very little additonal box space. With the Pontiac interior options, the differing door panels, being molded flat, didn't take up that much space either, leaving only the seats. That made it easier for it to be profitable to offer both variants of each kit as "2/1" kits.

Scans of the different Ford & Pontiac instructions sheets can be seen at these links to better illustrate my point:

I can't find the "2/1" Pontiac instructions or I would have posted them too.

Other than the Round2 version of the "2/1" Ford, I have in my stash or have built each of these different versions, so I am very familiar with what's in each of them.

Perhaps knowing more of the facts & the background of the different kits & how Round2 approaches each release before going off on a rant will make your arguments more logical & valid.

As to the molded in color deal, well I'm not fond of that myself.

Thanks Mark!

I was aware of the "New" 2-in-1 issues of the Starliner and Catalina (probably wrong spellin'). What I was trying to say was that it might be difficult for R2 to combine the parts BM onto teh current Z-28 because of both kits high parts count (BM and Z28 have diffrernt engines, hoods, wheels/tires, other bits and etc.), and packaging them together would mean a bigger box and a bigger price tag for them to produce and for the consumers.... along with the fact that if they'll sell in enough numbers to justify the cost.

...Which is why they keep doing many variants of the horrid General Lee kits because there's a HUGE market for them out there not just for modelers, but fans of the TV show/films and nostalga COLLECTORS who will buy ANYTHING! - even an unopened moldy box of Star Wars cereal with a Luke Skywalker figure for god-only-knows how much it costs!!